|
Official Rules & FAQ's Compilation and discussion of official HeroScape Rules and Frequently Asked Questions. **Special attacks never receive any bonuses.** |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
||||
|
||||
Movement powers that break (and do not break) engagement
Powers that use the "[move] over water without stopping, pass over figures without becoming engaged, and fly over obstacles such as ruins" wording always break engagement at the beginning of the move. Leaving engagement attacks may apply, and engagement strike-esqe powers get another crack at the figure, even if it moves from one spot next to that figure to another. These powers include:
By contrast, many other movement powers simply state that you may place a figure on another space. Most of these powers state whether leaving engagement attacks apply. However, leaving engagement attacks can only apply if placing on the new space moves the figure out of engagement. If a one of these powers moves a figure from one space adjacent to a Nakita Agent to another space adjacent to that same Nakita Agent, engagement is not broken, and engagement strike would not trigger. A list of powers that work this way include:
Last edited by dok; July 4th, 2020 at 02:42 PM. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Movement powers that break (and do not break) engagement
What rulings are there that back up this interpretation?
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Movement powers that break (and do not break) engagement
I already posted this in the Varkaanan Blade Dancer thread, but I figured I'd cross post here since I wasn't sure which thread it would be more appropriate to continue this discussion in. If I'm breaking etiquette by posting the same thing twice please just let me know and I'll delete whichever one is superfluous.
Looking at Swamp Water Tunnel, it would seem like that ability actually sets a strong precedent that figures do leave engagement when they start to use their "placement" abilities. The wording for Swamp Water Tunnel reads: Quote:
Presumably, Swamp Water Tunnel isn't a completely different kind of placement than other placement powers; other placement powers just typically don't have to highlight this because they're not subject to leaving engagement attacks at all. This interaction suggests to me that all placement powers result in a break in engagement at the time of activation, regardless of their destination. |
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: Movement powers that break (and do not break) engagement
The official FAQ, mainly. It specifically speaks to flying and "Leap Like Special Powers", which are grouped together in several rulings. It specifically covers how these powers create a special condition of leaving engagement from all figures when you activate the power.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Sure, this could be interpreted to mean that you disengage from everything around you, but it's also how you would say it if that doesn't apply. So, absent any ruling that you do, there's no real reason to think it means mass disengagement. I default to the normal rules of Heroscape, which say that you leave engagement if you are going to move onto a space where you are no longer engaged. Again, the FAQ specifically lays out that the flying/leaping/swinging powers have to mass disengage to begin movement. From my perspective it would be pretty strange if this interpretation was intended to extend to chain grabs and such but the FAQ chose to specifically refer to only a small set of powers when describing it. Quote:
(Before that wording became common, the previous "place" powers that did not ignore LEAs - Glacier Traverse and Grapple Gun - did not include this wording. This is almost surely a matter of the wording getting more consistent as Heroscape aged.) Last edited by dok; July 2nd, 2020 at 03:30 PM. Reason: Corrected my multiquotes |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
I think it's worth noting that RotV Drake's Grapple Gun is not a "place" power, as it specifically lets him "move one space." That leaves Glacier Traverse as the only "placement" power that is both subject to leaving engagement attacks and does not include the phrase "If figure is engaged when figure starts to [Tunnel, Shadow Dance, etc.], figure will take any leaving engagement attacks." In my mind this just seems like a case of poor wording in the case of the Dzu-Teh that was subsequently fixed in every other "placement" power subject to leaving engagement attacks.
You mention that the FAQ specifically notes that Flying causes a break in engagement at the moment of activation but does not make a similar clarification for "placement" powers. In my opinion I don't think this necessarily means that "placement" does not also cause a break in engagement. I think the FAQ exists to cover questions that arise relatively often based on a reading of the card. Because the vast majority of "placement" powers aren't subject to leaving engagement attacks anyway, for most placement powers the question of whether engagement is broken just by activating the power is completely irrelevant (outside of extreme edge cases with engagement strikers). For this reason I'm not surprised that the FAQ doesn't specifically highlight that "placement" powers also cause a break in engagement, just like Flying. I was also able to find a fairly extensive discussion on this exact issue in the book of Nakita Agents. The discussion starts with this post made seven years ago: https://www.heroscapers.com/communit...&postcount=167 At the time it seemed like opinion was relatively split regarding whether or not a figure placed next to a Nakita it was previously adjacent to would trigger Engagement Strike. Ultimately it doesn't seem like a consensus was reached regarding "placement" powers and engagement strike, with @dok , @The B.I.V. , and @Lyrgard arguing that placement does not cause a break in engagement, while @Scytale , @Aldin , and @Yodaking thought that the similarity of the wording at the end of Flying and at the end of the placement powers that are subject to leaving engagment attacks was enough to suggest that both Flying and "placement" powers cause an automatic break in engagement as soon as they are declared to be used (I apologize if I misrepresented the positions of anyone I tagged; if so please let me know and I'll edit accordingly!). All that being said, most of the time it's a fairly irrelevant distinction anyway. The primary reason it's even being brought up again now is in the context of Motley Max. I also hope I'm not being annoying by continuing this discussion! I find rules questions like this very interesting and appreciate the dialogue, but I'll be happy to play with this whatever way the C3V rules team decides to follow (and if that consensus has already been reached by C3V, I'll stop bringing up counterpoints ). Last edited by Dysole; July 4th, 2020 at 01:45 AM. |
#6
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: Movement powers that break (and do not break) engagement
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Play Style: To Break Or Not To Break? | chas | HeroScape General Discussion | 3 | August 26th, 2014 10:02 AM |
How did you break that again? | Chilling Touch | HeroScape General Discussion | 14 | May 31st, 2010 10:10 PM |
Will we ever break 300 | chief | HeroScape General Discussion | 53 | February 20th, 2008 09:47 AM |
Jail break. | theats | Maps & Scenarios | 6 | October 21st, 2006 03:14 PM |